Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/9963/2010 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9963 of 2010
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================
ASHOKBHAI
SHIVSHANKAR TRIVEDI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
THE
STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH THE SECRETARY & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR PS PATEL
for Petitioner(s) : 1,
None
for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3.
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 25/08/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. By
way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution
of India, petitioner has prayed for appropriate writ, direction or
order quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 07.07.2003
passed by the District Civil Supply Officer, Valsad (Annexure A) and
the order dated 07.10.2003 passed by respondent No.2, Collector,
Valsad in Appeal No.10/2003 as well as the impugned order dated
02.01.2006 passed by the Revisional Authority in Revision Application
No.101/2003 and the order dated 05.05.2010 passed in Revision
Application No.19/2010 passed by the Secretary, Food and Civil
Supplies Department, State of Gujarat by which the license in favour
of the petitioner to run Fair Price Shop has been cancelled.
2. Petitioner
was granted a license to run Fair Price Shop at Vapi, Taluka Pardi,
District Valsad. That on the basis of the surprise checking by the
District Supply Officer, Valsad on 08.04.2003, 09.05.2003, 09.04.2003
and 10.05.2003, various irregularities were found in supply of
kerosene and it was found that 180 liters of kerosene was sold
without any entry in the 46 cards and duplicate bills were issued
with respect to total 526 liters of kerosene and the same was sold
for which there were no entries in the ration cards. That after
giving an opportunity to the petitioner, by order dated 07.07.2003,
the District Supply Officer, Valsad passed the order to cancel the
license of the petitioner to run the Fair Price Shop. That being
aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the District
Supply Officer, Valsad dated 07.07.2003, petitioner preferred Appeal
before the Collector, Valsad which came to be dismissed by the
Collector, Valsad by order dated 07.10.2003. Being aggrieved and
dissatisfied with the aforesaid two orders, petitioner approached the
State Government Revisional Authority by filing Revision
Application No.101/2003 and the same came to be dismissed by the
State Government by order dated 02.01.2006. It appears that against
the aforesaid orders, petitioner preferred Special Civil Application
No.21933/2006 and the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner withdrew the same with a view to make representation to
the State Government. That thereafter petitioner approached the State
Government again which was numbered as Revision Application
No.19/2010, which has been dismissed by the impugned order passed by
the State Government. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
aforesaid orders in cancelling the license in favour of the
petitioner to run Fair Price Shop, petitioner has preferred the
present Special Civil Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India.
3. Shri
Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has
vehemently submitted that the order passed by the District Supply
Officer, confirmed by the Appellate and Revisional Authorities, is in
breach of principles of natural justice and there was no material
before the District Supply Officer with respect to the alleged
irregularity committed by the petitioner. It is submitted that the
statements of ration card holders were not recorded and if recorded,
the same are not given to the petitioner. Therefore, it is requested
to admit/allow the present petition. No other submissions have been
made.
4. Having
heard Shri Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and considering the impugned orders, it appears that the
allegation of irregularity in supply/sale of kerosene against the
petitioner has been proved. The finding given by the District
Supply Officer is based upon verification of various records
maintained by the petitioner and as the charge against the petitioner
with respect to irregularity in sale of kerosene without making
necessary entries in the ration card and preparation of duplicate and
false bills have been proved it cannot be said that authority has
erred in cancelling the license in favour of the petitioner to run
Fair Price Shop, which calls for interference of this Court in
exercise of powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India. No illegality has been committed by the authorities below.
5. In
view of the above and for the reasons stated above, petition deserves
to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(M.R.
Shah, J.)
*menon
Top